The majority supported passing the bill in the House of Representatives. In parliamentary jargon, they voted to read the bill for a third time.

The bill will now go to the Senate for their consideration.

What does the bill do?

The bill is a response to McGlade v Native Title Registrar & Ors [2017] FCAFC 10, which considers whether an Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) can be registered with the Native Title Registrar even if not all named parties have signed. An Indigenous Land Use Agreement is a voluntary agreement that native title groups can negotiate with other parties in relation to the use of land and waters.

In that case, the Federal Court ruled that all parties must sign, which meant the Noongar Native Title agreement could not be registered (read more in ABC News).

This happened on 2 February, and the Government immediately moved to protect existing agreements with this bill. According to the explanatory memorandum, its purpose is to:

confirm the legal status and enforceability of agreements which have been registered by the Native Title Registrar on the Register of Indigenous Land Use Agreements without the signature of all members of a registered native title claimant (RNTC)

enable registration of agreements which have been made but have not yet been registered on the Register of Indigenous Land Use Agreements, and

ensure that in the future, area ILUAs can be registered without requiring every member of the RNTC to be a party to the agreement.

More detail and background information is available in the bills digest.

Yes

No (strong)

Passed by a small majority

How
"voted very strongly against"
is worked out

The MP's votes count towards a weighted average where the most important votes get
50 points,
less important votes get
10 points,
and less important votes for which the MP was absent get
2 points.
In important votes the MP gets awarded the full
50 points
for voting the same as the policy,
0 points
for voting against the policy, and
25 points
for not voting. In less important votes, the MP gets
10 points
for voting with the policy,
0 points
for voting against, and
1
(out of 2)
if absent.

Then, the number gets converted to a simple english language phrase based on the range of values it's within.

No of votes

Points

Out of

Most important votes (50 points)

MP voted with policy

0

0

0

MP voted against policy

1

0

50

MP absent

0

0

0

Less important votes (10 points)

MP voted with policy

0

0

0

MP voted against policy

0

0

0

Less important absentees (2 points)

MP absent*

0

0

0

Total:

0

50

*Pressure of other work means MPs or
Senators are not always available to vote – it does not always
indicate they have abstained. Therefore, being absent on a less
important vote makes a disproportionatly small
difference.